Re: OLTC maggy

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "boris petkovic by way of Terry Fritz <teslalist-at-qwest-dot-net>" <petkovic7-at-yahoo-dot-com>

Steve,
Are you ready to accept the challenge and build one
*true* 6th-order OLTC  system?
If yes,than you should agree to increase your power
supply capability to at least 800-900 W.
I'm quite sure ,there are capable people on this list

that would like to help you in this new TC adventure.

best regards,
Boris



--- Tesla list <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com> wrote:
 > Original poster: "Terry Fritz" <teslalist-at-qwest-dot-net>
 >
 > Hi Steve,
 >
 > In general, the faster we can convert the low
 > voltage high current primary
 > energy into higher voltages and low currents
 > somewhere (anywhere) else, the
 > lower the losses will be.  In a magnifier, the
 > second stage may be useful.
 > to store energy longer with lower loss while the
 > final primary can convert
 > that energy into sparks.
 >
 > There is a problem with getting even higher coupling
 > than we have now.  We
 > just don't have enough turns to get in the say 0.7
 > coupling area.  But we
 > may be able to hit one of Antonio's "sweet spots".
 > This may also help the
 > recharging problem you mention.
 >
 > A magnifier may also be easier to tune since we have
 > more freedom to play
 > with the secondary frequency in a three coil system.
 >
 > Cheers,
 >
 >          Terry
 >
 >
 > At 09:54 PM 4/4/2003 +0100, you wrote:
 > >At 12:30 04/04/03 -0700, you wrote:
 > >>Original poster: "boris petkovic by way of Terry
 > Fritz
 > >><teslalist-at-qwest-dot-net>" <petkovic7-at-yahoo-dot-com>
 > >>
 > >>In adition to my previous post:
 > >>Has someone considered building "Off line 3 coil
 > >>system"?
 > >
 > >The coupling in a typical OLTC (well, both of the
 > OLTCs that exist) is so
 > >high that it might as well be a magnifier. Terry's
 > and mine both quench
 > >after about 3 cycles, suggesting a coupling around
 > 0.25. Having said that,
 > >if the energy transfer were speeded up even more,
 > like to 0.5 or 1 cycle,
 > >it could reduce "gap" losses. This is a good thing
 > because the IGBTs are
 > >probably more lossy than a real spark gap. Are
 > transfer times this fast
 > >possible with a maggie? Maybe ACMQ could advise us
 > here?
 > >
 > >On the other hand, one of the problems I had with
 > the OLTC was that the
 > >secondary kicks back into the primary after
 > turnoff, and partially
 > >recharges the tank cap via the flywheel diodes.
 > This interferes with the
 > >charge circuit and makes the bangs smaller than
 > they should be. The higher
 > >the coupling, the worse this effect is. So on a
 > magnifier it might be
 > >unacceptable. It can be combated by just increasing
 > the supply voltage,
 > >but then if the cap were to start off fully
 > discharged for some reason,
 > >you'd blow something out.
 > >
 > >Steve C.
 > >
 >
 >